Ramon F. Herrera Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) [Men and Women Working - Come Back Later] This is what I have so far: https://goo.gl/da4mcQ [For those unfamiliar with Google Drive, you only click ONCE] Plus this: https://goo.gl/cZ7Axr [For those unfamiliar with Google Drive, you only click ONCE] Open Source 3D Model of Dealey Plaza: https://goo.gl/jTy69B [For those unfamiliar with Google Drive, you only click ONCE] Lee's Backyard Photos: https://goo.gl/cGA1F8 -RFH Edited November 24, 2015 by Ramon F. Herrera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 [Men and Women Working - Come Back Later] This is what I have so far: https://goo.gl/da4mcQ [For those unfamiliar with Google Drive, you only click ONCE] Plus this: https://goo.gl/cZ7Axr [For those unfamiliar with Google Drive, you only click ONCE] -RFH nice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 I really wish you the best on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Solution to what? Is the subtext of Mr. Herrera's work the assumption that conspiracy in the murder of JFK is an open question? The fact of conspiracy was established by the first wave of researchers. It's interesting to watch and see who buys into the notion the fact of conspiracy hasn't already been established beyond a shadow of a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon F. Herrera Posted October 30, 2015 Author Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) Solution to what? Is the subtext of Mr. Herrera's work the assumption that conspiracy in the murder of JFK is an open question? The fact of conspiracy was established by the first wave of researchers. It's interesting to watch and see who buys into the notion the fact of conspiracy hasn't already been established beyond a shadow of a doubt. It has not been established, esteemed Cliff. Not ( a ) Mathematically ( b ) Based on 21st. Century Science and Leading Edge Technology. ( c ) Led by We The People ( d ) In an Open, Competitive Research environment ( e ) Without having to beg for a morsel or scrap from the National Archives. Cliff: Did you notice THE most important folders in the Google Drive? Those would be the ones named "Support Files" in every sub-project. Not only you but the Dale Myers and Gerald Posners of the world will have full access to their contents. As soon as I have my first simulation (of the Parkland Effect aka Conservation of Momentum aka Common Sense) ready I will challenge our esteemed David Von Pein (much respected because he is the only one from the other side who has enough cojones to show his face here): "WHEN CAN WE EXPECT TO SEE THE RESULTS FROM YOUR SIMULATION? ps: do not forget the support files" -Ramon Edited October 31, 2015 by Ramon F. Herrera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Solution to what? Is the subtext of Mr. Herrera's work the assumption that conspiracy in the murder of JFK is an open question? The fact of conspiracy was established by the first wave of researchers. It's interesting to watch and see who buys into the notion the fact of conspiracy hasn't already been established beyond a shadow of a doubt. It has not been established, esteemed Cliff. But it has, esteemed Ramon. You see, the simple physical facts of the case prove conspiracy. Here, you can measure the location of the bullet hole in the jacket right here: According to the 3-shot scenario JFK was struck in the back base of his neck. That bullet had to exit JFK's throat and wound Connally in 3 locations. Is the back base of YOUR neck 4 inches below the bottom of your clothing collars, Ramon? Of course not. Not ( a ) Mathematically Yes, mathematically. Measure the location of the bullet hole in the jacket yourself. ( b ) Based on 21st. Century Science and Leading Edge Technology. Or, you could show the jacket photo to a five year old, who can measure the location with pre-21st Century technology -- a ruler! -- and make the simple observation that the bullet hole is too low. ( c ) Led by We The People Vincent Salandria and Gaeton Fonzi established the fact of conspiracy back in the mid-60's -- fine leaders of "We The People". https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_Fonzi-Specter_Interviews.html ( d ) In an Open, Competitive Research environment You are unfamiliar with the work of Salandria and Fonzi. ( e ) Without having to beg for a morsel or scrap from the National Archives. Fonzi confronted Arlen Specter with the direct evidence of 2+ shooters and Specter had no rebuttal. Specter had to ignore the physical evidence to promote the SBT. http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WCTandAS.html You choose to ignore the physical evidence, don't you, Ramon? Cliff: Did you notice THE most important folders in the Google Drive? Unless you can tell us with certainty how many times JFK was shot in the head or tell us what ordnance was used -- what good is it? Those would be the ones named "Support Files" in every sub-project. Not only you but the Dale Myers and Gerald Posners of the world will have full access to their contents. The significance of your work appears to reside solely in the "ether of your imagination," as Carl Oglesby would say. As soon as I have my first simulation (of the Parkland Effect aka Conservation of Momentum aka Common Sense) ready I will challenge our esteemed David Von Pein (much respected because he is the only one from the other side who has enough cojones to show his face here): David Von Pein has admitted JFK's jacket was elevated "a little bit" in the Croft 3 photo on Elm St. That observation destroys the SBT. You're 50 years late for the party, Ramon. "WHEN CAN WE EXPECT TO SEE THE RESULTS FROM YOUR SIMULATION? ps: do not forget the support files) -Ramon Please understand this, Ramon. I would have ignored your work completely if you hadn't started a thread suggesting that the throat entrance wound was not a fact. You're following the Pet Theorist Script to the max -- always throw pixie dust on the prima facie case for conspiracy when you want to artificially inflate the importance of your own work. It's a blight on research, this attitude. Edited October 31, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I really wish you the best on this. Never met a rabbit hole he didn't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) It's interesting to watch and see who buys into the notion the fact of conspiracy hasn't already been established beyond a shadow of a doubt. Bethesda, Nov. 22, 2005. The Cracking the Case Conference. The stage was filled with top experts and one such Tony Summers intones (paraphrase) -- "We must not ask what kind of conspiracy, but IF there was a conspiracy." Seated next to Summers stage left was one Jefferson Morley bobbing his head up and down in agreement. None of the 200 or so present challenged him. Shame on me -- I was floored. That was my excuse. Morley and Summers committed journalistic malpractice. I went to that conference a proud member of the JFK Critical Research Community but by the time I got back to the Bay I was its' biggest critic. Edited November 1, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Cliff: Did you notice THE most important folders in the Google Drive? Those would be the ones named "Support Files" in every sub-project. ps: do not forget the support files" Ramon, You may want to consider pointing out that your "Support Files" are in the C4D format, a three-dimensional model created with Cinema 4D, a professional 3D modelling and animation program. Show of hands, please. How many of you have this program installed on your computer? Perhaps you could post these vital files in a more convenient format? OR at least post a link to a FREE file viewer that will open these files... Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon F. Herrera Posted November 5, 2015 Author Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) Ramon, You may want to consider pointing out that your "Support Files" are in the C4D format, a three-dimensional model created with Cinema 4D, a professional 3D modelling and animation program. Show of hands, please. How many of you have this program installed on your computer? Perhaps you could post these vital files in a more convenient format? OR at least post a link to a FREE file viewer that will open these files... Tom Hi Tom: Please look the repository structure, closely. At the top of each project's folder, I have placed the files for end users, in convenient formats that are "playable" by many applications: MP4, etc. The intended target of the "Support Files" are people who want to investigate the matter further, in order to confirm or deny my results. This is an open and competitive process. For example, a person (say, Walter Alvarez -out of filial loyalty- or Gerald Posner) who claims that it is possible to have a Jet Effect spewing from a wide open gaping wound and still produce a violent back snap ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKC_zBA50HA ...should feel free to take my files, hire an expert(s) with a PhD in FEA and/or CFD (*), perform his simulations, show us a John Kennedy achieving airborne propulsion AND POST his Support Files. That is the only way Science (with a capital "S") works. Alternatively, s/he should be free to use his/her own files which must be posted for the world to see. By definition, Science must be repeatable. This is known as "Peer Review" and "Trial by Fire". What I am doing is the equivalent to Linux and Open Source Software in general. 99.9% of the users do not need the source code, but it is intellectually honest to include it. All those numbered references (citations) at the bottom of research papers are also equivalent. Notice the 9 tags at the top of this thread. Regards, -Ramon (*) I can recommend some. Nomenclature: F.E.A.: Finite Element Analysis C.F.D.: Computational Fluid Dynamics Edited November 5, 2015 by Ramon F. Herrera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon F. Herrera Posted November 5, 2015 Author Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) Having said that... Here's a trick to download files from YouTube: Let's say that the URL is: www.youtube.com/whatever. Just add the 2 letters "ss" before "youtube", like so: www.ssyoutube.com/whatever. You will be downloading the MP4 file to your hard disk. BUT it would be silly, since you can find the same video clip in the TOP QUALITY that I paid for, in my Google Drive. (The Google Drive is a temporary poor man's website). A manger. Edited November 5, 2015 by Ramon F. Herrera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now